Supreme Court of Christmas Island
The Supreme Court of Christmas Island was the highest court for Christmas Island, an external territory of Australia. The court was originally established in 1958 after sovereignty over the island was transferred from the United Kingdom to Australia. The court had jurisdiction to deal with all serious crimes and major civil claims for damages occurring on the island. The court was abolished on 10 May 2002.
Judges from Australian courts were appointed to be judges of the court. Those judges would travel to the island to hear, consider and determine cases. In 1992, courts in Western Australia were given concurrent authority to deal with cases on the island, and those courts became the main venue in which litigation was conducted. Since the court’s abolition, its functions have been replaced by the Supreme Court of Western Australia, which now has sole jurisdiction on the island.
First courts on the island
Europeans first discovered the island of Christmas Island on Christmas Day, 25 December 1643. Captain William Mynors gave the island its name because of the day it was found.
The British Crown annexed the uninhabited island on 6 June 1888 following the discovery of phosphate on the island. The island was annexed to the Straits Settlements colony on 10 June 1900. Japanese Imperial Forces occupied the island during the Second World War. After the end of the Second World War, a military court was set up in Singapore to prosecute seven people for mutiny during the war. With the dissolution of the Straits Settlements in 1946, the island was included within the new Singapore colony. On 1 October 1958, sovereignty over the island was transferred to the Australian Government following a payment to the Government of Singapore, after a brief period as a separate British colony.
Establishment of the court
The court was established by section 11 of the Christmas Island Act 1958 (Cth). That same law signified the acceptance by Australia of Christmas Island as a territory. The court was in all respects a superior court and had all the same powers that other supreme courts in Australia had. The court was to be constituted according to local ordinances made by the Governor-General of Australia on the advice of the Australian Government.
The court was a superior court and a court of record. Judges appointed by the Governor-General constituted it as required. The court was permitted to sit anywhere in Australia as the interests of justice required, and was confined to hearing a case on the island. When hearing criminal cases, the court sat with a jury to determine an accused person’s guilt. If the court sat outside the island, the court could use jurors from the State or Territory that the court was actually sitting at.
In April 1988 the court tried two defendants concerning the murder of Tan Soo Cher (Tan). Tan had been murdered during the early hours of 12 May 1987 by the infliction of multiple stab wounds to the front and back of his torso and his arms. The defendants were alleged to have approached Tan in the hope of borrowing money. On the defendants’ version of events, Tan refused and brandished a knife. The defendants claimed to have disarmed Tan, stabbed him, and then left with the money found on Tan. The defendants argued self-defence at their trial.
The trial was held in Western Australia rather than Christmas Island and led to the conviction of the defendants. On appeal to the Federal Court of Australia, Justices Jenkinson, Spender and French ordered new trials because the jury was not properly directed as to provocation. The case was unusual in that the defendants were tried on the basis of a murder charge under the Singapore Criminal Code, which continued to apply on Christmas Island, rather than Australian law. Justice French remarked that the case highlighted “the legal twilight” in which Australians on Christmas Island lived. French said that criminal laws were established under the Singapore Code, unchanged since 1958, which in turn had been based on the Indian Penal Code drafted in 1837 and introduced in India in 1862. This all led to the unsatisfactory situation of prosecuting Australians under Singaporean law.
Abolition of the court
Since 1992, courts in Western Australia have undertaken the work of the court under a service delivery arrangement with the Commonwealth Government. This was introduced at the same time as the introduction of Western Australian law to the island. The Western Australian Magistrates Court, District Court, Supreme Court, Family Court, Children's Court and Coroner's Court all provide services to the island as required. As a result, a separate superior court in the territory was no longer necessary. A proclamation issued by the Governor-General under section 14G of the Christmas Island Act formally abolished the Court on 10 May 2002.
- Jupp, p. 323
- Rumley, p. 74
- Section 8A
- Cowan, p. 144
- UWA p. 539
- Section 11A
- Section 12
- Section 12A
- Chong v The Queen 40 A Crim R 22
- Chong v The Queen 40 A Crim R 22 at 55 http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/FCA/1989/66.html
- Chong v The Queen 40 A Crim R 22 at 55
- Chong v The Queen 40 A Crim R 22 at 56
- Annual Report. Christmas Island
- Christmas Island Act 1958 (Cth)
- “The Australian People”, James Jupp, Cambridge University Press, 2001. ISBN 0-521-80789-1
- ”The Constitutional Systems of the Australian States and Territories”, Gerard Carney, Cambridge University Press, 2006. ISBN 0-521-86305-8
- ”Australia’s Arc of Instablility”, Dennis Rumley, Vivian Louis Forbes and Christopher Griffin. Springer Publishing. 2006. ISBN 1-4020-3825-9
- “Federal Jurisdiction in Australia”, 1959, by Zelman Cowen, Oxford University Press. ISBN 0-19-550054-7
- “Annual Law Review” by Law School, 1959, University of Western Australia
- The Cambridge Handbook of Australian Criminology. Adam Graycar, Peter N. Grabosky. p73. ISBN 0-521-81845-1
- Chong v The Queen. 40 Australian Criminal Reports (A Crim R) 22 at 55